Yellow Sac Spider

[What]

I've read that report, and I was neither impressed nor convinced.

And you are still the only one on here trying to claim they *are* dangerous...

 

[Venom]

And you are still the only one on here trying to claim they *are* dangerous...

"Medically significant."

The term "dangerous" is one step higher on my scale. I'm not saying that sac spiders will rot your flesh and endanger your life. I'm saying they cause suffering via swelling, pain, fever, tenderness of the bite, and occasionally a minor necrotic blister--all of which is true. That study which was linked to is light-years away from being conclusive, and actually proves nothing.

I am far from being the only one here who sees the (minor) clinical significance of sac spiders. Even if I were, that would not make me wrong.

 

[What]

I am far from being the only one here who sees the (minor) clinical significance of sac spiders. Even if I were, that would not make me wrong.

There is the "minor clinical significance" to any spider bite, singling out sac spiders as being "medically significant" because of their symptoms is like singling out the agave native to my area that cause swelling, pain, and tenderness when you get even just a pin prick sized puncture wound from one...

 

[Venom]

There is the "minor clinical significance" to any spider bite,

No, I don't think so. Allergic reaction aside, most spider bites don't merit any "clinical significance." I have seen bites from this spider ( C. inclusum ) render a digit or other body part unusable due to pain. Slight fever and chills, and nausea can also occur. You don't get that from an Argiope..

singling out sac spiders as being "medically significant" because of their symptoms is like singling out the agave native to my area that cause swelling, pain, and tenderness when you get even just a pin prick sized puncture wound from one...

No, its not. The spider uses venom. The plant is simply a spiky thorny thing. Mechanical and chemical attacks cannot be equated. Read the bite reports from C. inclusum, and then ask yourself why there aren't Araneus diadematus and Lycosa gulosa and Parasteatoda tepidariorum bite reports out there, when these are three of the most common, widespread, and human-encountering spiders in North America! The answer is, "because sac spiders are different." --they are more toxic than your average, backyard spider, and do cause notable discomfort, pain, and visible local manifestations.

The bite hurts like crazy, and can make you feel ill, and that alone simply puts Cheiracanthium one step above the Araneus, Lycosa, and Parasteatoda. Not very far above them, mind you, but enough for me to point out to novices and casual enquirers that this spider in particular can have a noticeable effect on them if they are bitten.

 

[What]

No, its not. The spider uses venom. The plant is simply a spiky thorny thing. Mechanical and chemical attacks cannot be equated.

There is an irritant present in the skin of the agave, not just mechanical damage, that was the point.

The answer is, "because sac spiders are different." --they are more toxic than your average, backyard spider, and do cause notable discomfort, pain, and visible local manifestations.

Right...they are dangerous just like T. agrestis is... oh...oops.

 

[The Spider Faery]

Oh boy, now I'm not any more or less confident that the yellow sac spider does or doesn't have medically significant venom. But I probably won't post on arachnoboards when and if I ever find another one in my home.

As long as everyone wishes to debate, I don't mind that my thread has taken this direction, as long as it's kept civil.

 

[buthus]

Sorry, but the "misinformation" statement claiming that C. inclusum is overblown...was itself a piece of misinformation.

Though I may be wrong for doing so...Im going to assume you are referring to my statement...

Sac spiders "danger" has been GREATLY over-exaggerated ..to the point of silliness.

Now..notice the term "danger". Ok..now compare the term "danger" to the term "minor clinical significance". Did I state: Sac spiders "minor clinical significance" has been GREATLY over-exaggerated? Nope. If i did, that would be truly silly since terms such as "minor significance" make for lousy exaggeration...dont they?
You seem to be concerned with your own use of technical terms, yet you blur right over the words used by others. ...So you can chase your own tail in another useless argument while confusing the very "novices and casual enquirers" that you're attempting to educate. You do not educate..you argue.
Education would go something like this:
1. Sac spiders (and this could be said of any spider) are not dangerous.
2. Sac spiders will not harm you, your children or your pets.
3. Bites from spiders (including sac spiders) are extremely rare and most reported spider bites are questionable whether a spider was involved at all.
4. Confirmed bites from sac spiders have been reported, in some cases to to cause minor local irritation/pain and in rarer cases some minor flu like symptoms and/or minor necrosis around the bite area. No death, loss of limb, significant wounds nor significant illness has ever been attributed to the bite of a sac spider. Thus, they have been deemed a "minor clinical significance".
5. If you find a sac spider in or around your household and you live within their range, most likely there are many more AND you have been living peacefully with them from the first day you started residing there.
6. Sac spiders (as with all "house" spiders) are actually beneficial because they hunt down and feed on household pests.
7. The use of pesticides to eliminate household spiders actually can harm the people and pets that reside there and harms the environment itself while proven in most cases to be ineffective in eliminating the spiders themselves.

 

[The Spider Faery]

Just for the record, nobody used the term 'danger' except buthus.

But to me, any chance of necrotic wound is a scary risk, especially when it comes to the fact that I was reading reports that bites from this species of spider were more common than other species with medically significant venom; regardless of however more or less potent. I do and did realize there was no concern over losing a limb or anything to that extent, but a blistering wound is not my idea of a risk worth taking.

I still stick to my original point that when it comes to a person's home, it's their own decision which types of invading creatures they chose to allow to coexist, but more credit should certainly be given to the fact that someone (like myself) would make the effort to research the species before making that decision, instead of going "Eww, swat", instinctively, which I didn't do.

It's not my fault if the information that exists either somewhere else on the internet or even on this board is not entirely factual. Again, all one can do is decide for themself what their comfort level is, given the information at hand.

And from here, I feel I'll just be going in circles if I add anything else, but anyone else who wishes to debate or add more information, go ahead.

 

[LeilaNami]

Just for the record, nobody used the term 'danger' except buthus.

But to me, any chance of necrotic wound is a scary risk, especially when it comes to the fact that I was reading reports that bites from this species of spider were more common than other species with medically significant venom; regardless of however more or less potent. I do and did realize there was no concern over losing a limb or anything to that extent, but a blistering wound is not my idea of a risk worth taking.

I still stick to my original point that when it comes to a person's home, it's their own decision which types of invading creatures they chose to allow to coexist, but more credit should certainly be given to the fact that someone (like myself) would make the effort to research the species before making that decision, instead of going "Eww, swat", instinctively, which I didn't do.

It's not my fault if the information that exists either somewhere else on the internet or even on this board is not entirely factual. Again, all one can do is decide for themself what their comfort level is, given the information at hand.

And from here, I feel I'll just be going in circles if I add anything else, but anyone else who wishes to debate or add more information, go ahead.

Sorry it just touched a nerve since I have to deal every day with many people that kill animals out of ignorance. More so than some because I work in a pet store. Didn't mean to jump on your case but to clarify, Venom is right that sac spiders have medically significant venom however the argument should be is if they are actually dangerous. One doesn't always equal the other. I voiced my opinion to suggest other options to immediately flushing the spider. You might have even found someone in your area that would have liked to have it :} It is still ultimately your choice but your decision was not the one I would have made is all. You are right that it wasn't your fault at all and that wasn't something I meant to imply or should be implied by anyone else. I think that fact that a spider was killed just touched a nerve for a lot of people since some here actually keep the species in question.

 

[buthus]

Jeeeeeze! Yep..who cares about the single spider being killed.


The reality is, eliminating one hardly changed any odds ...the "scary risk" factor was NOT changed. MOST likely you have a decent population of them living with you ..gaps in floor molding, under paneling, under carpet, in the attic, basement..in those old shoes back in the closet, etc,etc ...sac spidies do great in dry places with limited prey. I just had one descend from my hobby room ceiling..right in front of my monitors. I caught it mid air and fed it to one of my Sicarius.

 

[Harmony67]

Just for the record, nobody used the term 'danger' except buthus.

But to me, any chance of necrotic wound is a scary risk, especially when it comes to the fact that I was reading reports that bites from this species of spider were more common than other species with medically significant venom; regardless of however more or less potent. I do and did realize there was no concern over losing a limb or anything to that extent, but a blistering wound is not my idea of a risk worth taking.

I still stick to my original point that when it comes to a person's home, it's their own decision which types of invading creatures they chose to allow to coexist, but more credit should certainly be given to the fact that someone (like myself) would make the effort to research the species before making that decision, instead of going "Eww, swat", instinctively, which I didn't do.

It's not my fault if the information that exists either somewhere else on the internet or even on this board is not entirely factual. Again, all one can do is decide for themself what their comfort level is, given the information at hand.

And from here, I feel I'll just be going in circles if I add anything else, but anyone else who wishes to debate or add more information, go ahead.

I will not question your right to keep your home as you see fit. We all have to make that decision and I respect you for it.

When I lived in my house I did not kill the yellow spiders (or any spiders) because I felt they were helping by keeping the insect population regulated. I lived in an older home and we had a lot of bugs get in.

However, I have been bitten many times in my life by these spiders and it is unpleasant. It took weeks for the little, sunken, yellowish, sore, itchy wounds to heal. That is the only ill effect I have had from them.

The apartment I now live in doesn't have them, but we have beautifully marked larger spiders who sneak in on occasion. I put them out on the balcony in good weather and leave them alone otherwise.

 

[jsloan]

I'm not saying that sac spiders will rot your flesh and endanger your life. I'm saying they cause suffering via swelling, pain, fever, tenderness of the bite, and occasionally a minor necrotic blister--all of which is true. That study which was linked to is light-years away from being conclusive, and actually proves nothing.

It's interesting that you would say this, since the symptoms you describe are all confirmed in the very study you are ignoring. See tables one and two.

 

[spider pest]

I've tried keeping a couple this year and they didn't do well at all. When I come across them indoors they either get put outside or become dinner for something else.

 

[The Spider Faery]

The apartment I now live in doesn't have them, but we have beautifully marked larger spiders who sneak in on occasion. I put them out on the balcony in good weather and leave them alone otherwise.

I also live in an apartment and have only seen a few spiders the entire time I've lived here. One was eventually identified as a steatoda (with the help of widowman), which I still find weird finding one here. That one I put outside because it was warmer weather outside. The other few were zebra spiders which I left alone since there were living in the window pane in amongst my flowers and weren’t a worry at all, and the last was this yellow sac spider which I would also have put outside, but since it's in the negatives below zero here, I didn't have that option.

 

[cacoseraph]

for the record, i believe there are two species of C.'s in the USA (and canada, heh). one is native and one is introduced from europe.


so their is maybe half a chance that you killed an invader, which is good.



also, the specimens i have found were not bitey in the least. i can't get the stupid things to bite me, in fact. i have partially squished them, with fangs already touching my skin, and got nothing but a broken spider




and i would really REALLY like to reiterate what jsloan pointed out: someone with some sore on the their skin, claiming it is a sac spider bite is just ludicrous. their are so many bacteria, insects, and other pathogens that are way way more likely to be the cause of a mark or pustule or flu-like symptoms (like, er, the flu =P) than these little spiders

 

[The Spider Faery]

Well thanks for the all info, guys. It was an eye opener. I wasn't going to trust just one article on the internet, but since I found several that where all stating the same thing, I just took it as fact that these little spiders were holy terrors. I guess from now on I'll not be too quick to take the 'net as fact and come here for advice first before making a 'to flush or not to flush' decision so hastily.

 

[Harmony67]

I also live in an apartment and have only seen a few spiders the entire time I've lived here. One was eventually identified as a steatoda (with the help of widowman), which I still find weird finding one here. That one I put outside because it was warmer weather outside. The other few were zebra spiders which I left alone since there were living in the window pane in amongst my flowers and weren’t a worry at all, and the last was this yellow sac spider which I would also have put outside, but since it's in the negatives below zero here, I didn't have that option.

The spiders here in the apartment are Dolomedes tenebrosus--fishing spiders. They catch bugs on the water so I guess it's best that they do go back outside in good weather!